Ruling by edict?
In the present election campaign, candidates are indicating that what they advocate can immediately come about by edict. Thus, if elected, the candidate would make for a smaller government in the following stated ideas, among others;

Do away with the "death tax," Reduce the national debt Lower income tax levels and rates Eliminate two or three Cabinet positions such as the Department of Education Deregulate so that the economic sector might grow Do away immediately with the Affordable Health Care Act Reduce the price of gasoline to two dollars a gallon Doing away with contraceptives and regulate/monitor fetus development with prescribed sonograms at intervals for women.


I recommend that candidates state specifically how they would have each expressed idea come to pass.
They should also indicate how each would benefit or harm the individual as well as society. Then too, ruling by edict is definitely not a part of the democratic process. Some of the above items contradict each other such as reducing the national debt versus cutting taxes. Changes advocated must be discussed in depth and evaluated thoroughly, not hastily.
— Marlow Ediger, North Newton